About

This page contains a single entry from the blog posted on October 30, 2008 6:12 AM. The previous post in this blog was Predictions. The next post in this blog is Happy days are here again. Many more can be found on the main index page or by looking through the archives.

E-mail, Feeds, 'n' Stuff

Thursday, October 30, 2008

Igniting the crowd in Alaska

There's a certain kind of politician who's immensely popular up there.

Comments (13)

That display at his welcome home event is very sad, to celebrate him after his conviction is worse than the Democrats in Congress celebrating Pres Clinton after his impeachment by Congress. Both of them broke the law; both deserve scorn, not praise.

Actually, I hope he does win re-election, and then have the Senate vote 99-1 for expulsion from the Senate, right after he is sworn in.

Um, Harry, did you happen to notice that Clinton was acquitted in his impeachment trial? Stevens = convicted. Clinton = acquitted. Slight difference there.

Despite Alaska's prohibition against felons voting, the State Board of Elections has decided that Uncle Ted can still vote because he won't be a convict until after the election:
http://www.adn.com/politics/story/572443.html.

Harry,

Ted Stevens is a hero in this state, plain and simple. Many here in Juneau are hoping that re-election and then resignation or removal is not the case. We would like very much for the person we vote in to retain the seat instead of leaving, having a new senator appointed by the governor until a special elections could be had (see: http://www.juneauempire.com/stories/082908/sta_324999890.shtml).

Also, the latest Rasmussen post-conviction poll puts Begich up 7 - 8 points, where the pre-conviction polls had Begich with a less than 1.5 point lead or in other polls losing by a point. (see: http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_senate_elections/alaska/election_2008_alaska_senate)

That said, Alaskans have porcine dreams no matter who is in that seat.

Allan,
I'm pretty sure Clinton was impeached (convicted by the House) but not punished by removal from office by the Senate.

Ben,
And I'm pretty sure, although, as the saying goes, I'm no Constitutional scholar, that impeachment is analogous to indictment. That sends the matter to a trial in the Senate.

The way things are going, in a few days we're probably going to find out that Sarah Palin has been robbing banks by disguising herself as a seal and brandishing one of the guns she uses to kill moose.

Actually, you don't have to be a constitutional scholar to use a dictionary. "Impeach" means "to make an accusation against" or "to charge (a public official) with improper conduct in office before a proper tribunal." (American Heritage Dictionary, 3d ed., p. 905.)
Sue is exactly correct: impeachment is like an indictment. Both are accusatory instruments, and have no force or effect until the trier of fact (judge or jury, in the case of an indictment; U.S. Senate, in the case of impeachment of a federal office-holder) decides whether the accused should be convicted. In President Clinton's case, the House did not "convict" him of anything; it made an accusation, which the Senate rejected.

"Sue is exactly correct"

That may be true Sue and Charlie, but the point is that after Clinton lied and behaved badly he was still celebrated. Stevens deeds are serious, but deserve no more public outrage than those despicable acts committed by Clinton. Not to mention acts committed by another winner, Ted Kennedy (who actually was convicted),and is still celebrated by some to this day.

Gibby, thanks for sharing your opinion. I can skip over your comments now without worrying that I may miss something intelligent.

Charlie, you're using one of those elitist dictionaries with definitions and stuff in it. What fun is that?

Thanks for the bait Fool, but I'm not hungry.

Kevin: Ted Stevens is a hero in this state, plain and simple. Many here in Juneau are hoping that re-election and then resignation or removal is not the case. We would like very much for the person we vote in to retain the seat instead of leaving, having a new senator appointed by the governor until a special elections could be had.

I'm all for that as well. We want to be sure that in 2012 we have a strong, visible reminder of exactly what Alaska politicians are all about, when Sarah Palin is the best that the Republicans can muster to challenge an incumbent President Obama running for a second term (John McCain of course having succombed to old age by that time). I suppose he can join his buddy Larry Craig in the Senate, but it will really will be all for naught, as they'll be in the minority.




Clicky Web Analytics